Comparison of lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone to dexamethasone alone in patients who have received prior thalidomide in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7522-7522 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Wang ◽  
R. Knight ◽  
M. Dimopoulos ◽  
D. Siegel ◽  
S. V. Rajkumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Significant Variable ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Pooled Data ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
The Impact

7522 Background: Lenalidomide (len), an analog of thalidomide (thal) is a novel, oral immunomodulatory agent that is effective against multiple myeloma (MM). Two randomized, Phase III trials (MM009 and MM010) have recently demonstrated superior responses and overall survival (OS) for patients (pts) treated with len and dexamethasone (dex) in comparison with dex-placebo. This is a prospective subgroup analysis to assess the impact of prior therapy with thal on the sensitivity of MM to subsequent lenalidomide. Methods: We evaluated 692 pts from both trials (MM009 and MM010). The pts had relapsed/refractory MM, were not refractory to dex and were randomized to receive either len (25 mg daily for 3 weeks (wks) every 4 wks) plus dex (40 mg on days 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 every 4 wks for 4 cycles, then 40 mg on days 1–4 every subsequent cycle) or placebo plus dex. Standard criteria were used to evaluate response and TTP. Results: Pooled data from 692 pts showed superior median TTP (48.1 vs 20.1 wks) and OR (59.2% vs 22.5%) in pts treated with len/dex compared to dex-placebo (p <0.001). Although subgroup analysis of pts with prior thal therapy revealed that pts who received len/dex had significantly improved OR, PR CR and median TTP than pts who received dex-placebo, OR, CR and TTP were highest in len/dex pts not previously treated with thal. Multivariate analysis indicates that after controlling for the treatment factor and baseline disease characteristics, whether or not pt had prior exposure to thal is a marginally significant variable to predict TTP. The risk of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in these subgroups will be updated on further analysis. Conclusions: Lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone is more effective than dexamethasone-placebo regardless of prior thalidomide in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Expanded Access Program (EAP) for Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) Plus Dexamethasone in over 1400 Subjects with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 3556-3556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Chen ◽  
Donna E. Reece ◽  
David Siegel ◽  
Ruben Niesvizky ◽  
Ralph Vincent Boccia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advocacy Groups ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Expanded Access ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Expanded Access Program ◽  
The Us ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Access Program

Abstract Background: Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) in combination with dexamethasone was approved in the US on June 29, 2006 for the treatment of subjects with multiple myeloma who had received at least one prior therapy. On February 28, 2005 based upon a positive interim analysis of two pivotal placebo-controlled Phase III studies, an independent Data Safety Monitoring Board recommended the studies be unblinded and all subjects in both studies be given access to lenalidomide. In April 2005, the FDA in association with myeloma patient advocacy groups requested Celgene establish an expanded access program to make lenalidomide plus dexamethasone available to subjects with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma while the treatment was awaiting approval. Aim: To provide lenalidomide to multiple myeloma subjects with a high likelihood of benefit and to obtain additional safety data. Methods: Subjects with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma that received at least 1 prior therapy were eligible. Subjects received 25 mg lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone in 4-week cycles until disease progression was documented, study drug was discontinued, or lenalidomide became commercially available for this indication. Results: Between September 8, 2005 and July 25, 2006, approximately 1400 subjects in the US and Canada were enrolled into the study. A data snapshot taken March 17, 2006 demonstrated that 746 subjects had been enrolled, median age was 63 years, 60% were male, and 66.5% had Stage III disease. Median time on study was 7.1 weeks (0.1–24.4) and median daily dose was 20.5 mg. At least one Grade 3 or 4 adverse event was reported in 261 (35%) of the 746 subjects. Most commonly reported Grade 3–4 events were neutropenia (7.9% of subjects), thrombocytopenia (6.0%), fatigue (3.6%), anemia (3.5%), pneumonia (3.1%) and hyperglycemia (2.0%). These most commonly reported Grade 3–4 adverse events were the same as those found in the previous pivotal studies, however, their frequencies of occurrence were lower in the current study probably due to ongoing data collection and differences in study maturity. Likewise, the most commonly reported adverse events (all grades) were the same as those reported in the two previous pivotal studies. Conclusion: Preliminary data from this expanded access program in over 1400 subjects with multiple myeloma are consistent with results from two earlier Phase III pivotal studies. The EAP of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone in multiple myeloma represents a model of how government, advocacy groups, healthcare providers and industry can work together to quickly provide treatment to subjects in need while a clearly active treatment regimen is awaiting approval.

Comparison of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone therapy used at first relapse versus later salvage therapy in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8594-8594
Author(s):  
E. A. Stadtmauer ◽  
D. M. Weber ◽  
R. Nieszvizky ◽  
A. Belch ◽  
H. M. Prince ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Salvage Therapy ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Duration Of Treatment ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
First Relapse

8594 Background: The benefit of initiating lenalidomide plus dexamethasone at first relapsed was evaluated in this subset analysis from phase III studies in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Methods: Patients from the randomized, multicenter clinical trials MM-009 and MM-010 who had received at least 1 prior treatment and were not resistant to dexamethasone were treated with lenalidomide (25 mg daily for 21 days of every 28 day cycle) plus dexamethasone (40 mg on days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20 every 28 days for 4 months, then 40 mg on days 1–4 every cycle thereafter until disease progression or intolerance), or dexamethasone (same dose and schedule) plus placebo. Baseline characteristics such as age, sex, ECOG score, and baseline β2-microglobulin levels between the 2 patient groups were similar, however, median time from diagnosis and prior therapy were statistically different. Results: Multivariate analysis showed that more prior therapies is associated with shorter time-to-progression (TTP). Patients who received 1 prior therapy demonstrated a significant improvement in outcomes such as TTP, progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), complete response/very good partial response rate (CR/VGPR), median duration of treatment and overall survival (OS) after first relapse compared with those who received ≥ 2 prior therapies ( Table ). Toxicity, rate of dose reduction, or treatment discontinuation in the cohort with 1 prior therapy did not increase, despite longer treatment. Conclusions: When used at first relapse compared with salvage therapy, lenalidomide plus dexamethasone treatment resulted in significantly prolonged TTP, PFS, and OS, and an improved quality of response. Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone should be considered at an early stage of therapy for patients with MM. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Pattern of progression in advanced HCC treated with ramucirumab/placebo: Results from two randomized phase III trials (REACH/REACH-2).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 544-544
Author(s):  
Maria Reig ◽  
Peter R. Galle ◽  
Masatoshi Kudo ◽  
Richard S. Finn ◽  
Josep M. Llovet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Cox Models ◽  
Poor Prognostic Factor ◽  
Advanced Hcc ◽  
Pooled Data ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
The Impact

544 Background: REACH (NCT01140347) and REACH-2 (NCT02435433) studied ramucirumab (RAM) in pts with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following sorafenib; REACH-2 enrolled pts with baseline alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL, and met its primary endpoint of overall survival (OS) for RAM vs placebo. This post-hoc analysis examined radiological progression patterns (RPP) incidence every 6 weeks per RECIST v1.1, and if RPP were related to OS and post-progression survival (PPS). Methods: Pts with advanced HCC, Child-Pugh A, and ECOG PS 0-1 with prior sorafenib were randomized (REACH 1:1; REACH-2 2:1) to receive RAM 8 mg/kg or placebo Q2W. Among pts with ≥1 RPP (new extrahepatic lesion [NEH], new intrahepatic lesion [NIH], extrahepatic growth [EHG], or intrahepatic growth [IHG]), results were analyzed by trial and for pooled individual patient data of REACH-2 and REACH (AFP ≥400 ng/mL). Cox models evaluated treatment effect of RPP on OS, and prognostic implications of RPP on OS (adjusting baseline ECOG PS, AFP, macrovascular invasion, arm) and on PPS (adjusting ECOG PS, AFP at progression). Results: RPP incidence in the pooled population was: NEH 39%; NIH 24%; EHG 39%; IHG 37%. When examining NEH vs other RPP, PPS was worse among those with NEH in REACH (HR 2.33, 95% CI 1.51, 3.60), REACH-2 (HR 1.49, 95% CI 0.72, 3.08), and the pooled data (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.12, 2.74). Use of post-discontinuation therapy may have influenced results. OS was also significantly reduced in those with NEH across studies (Table). RAM provided OS benefit in the pooled population, including pts with NEH (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.39, 0.80). Conclusions: Acknowledging limitations of post-randomization RPP analysis, the emergence of NEH on RAM or placebo may be an independent poor prognostic factor for PPS. The impact of RAM on OS was consistent across all RPP subgroups. Clinical trial information: NCT01140347 and NCT02435433. [Table: see text]

Lenalidomide in Combination with Dexamethasone Was More Effective Than Dexamethasone in Patients Who Have Received Prior Thalidomide for Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 3553-3553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Wang ◽  
Robert Knight ◽  
Melitios Dimopoulos ◽  
David Siegel ◽  
S. Vincent Rajkumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Remission Rate ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cross Resistance ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Hazards Model ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Beta 2 Microglobulin

Abstract Lenalidomide (Len), an analog of thalidomide (thal) is a novel, oral, immunomodulatory agent that is effective against multiple myeloma (MM). In 2 prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III trials. Len with dexamethasone (Dex) induced a significantly higher overall response rate (OR) and complete remission rate (CR), as well as longer time-to-progression (TTP) in comparison with Dex alone. This prospective analysis assessed whether prior thalidomide exposure might induce subsequent resistance to Len/Dex. We evaluated 704 patients (pts) from both trials (MM009, MM010) who had relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, had not been resistant to Dex and were randomized to receive either oral Len (25 mg daily for 3 weeks every 4 weeks) plus Dex (40 mg on days 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 every 4 weeks for 4 cycles) or placebo plus Dex. Two hundred seventy four pts (39%) received prior thal, while 430 (61%) had not. The prior thal exposed pts and thal-naive pts were similar in regard to age, Beta-2-microglobulin, hemoglobin, serum M protein, albumin and history of previous transplantation. The frequency of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (DVT/PE) with prior thal exposure was higher at 14% with Len/Dex than 4% with Dex alone (p < 0.01). However, the frequency of DVT/PE with no prior thal exposure was similar at 8% with Len/Dex to 6% with Dex alone (p = 0.49). In the prior thal pts, severe neuropathy occurred in 4% with Len/Dex, not significantly different from the 1% with Dex alone (p=0.2). The pooled data from all 704 pts showed that pts treated with Len/Dex, compared with those treated with Dex alone, had superior median Time-To-Progression (TTP) (48 vs 20 weeks) and OR (60% vs 22%, p <0.001). Similarly, among the subgroups exposed or not exposed to thal, Len/Dex was superior to Dex alone in OR and TTP. For the 126 patients who received prior thal, the OR with Len/Dex was significantly less (43%) among 54 Pts resistant to thal than that observed for 72 Pts who had been sensitive to thal (63%, p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis using Cox proportion hazards model indicated that after controlling for treatment (Len/Dex vs Dex) and baseline disease characteristics, independent and significant predictors of shorter TTP included prior thal exposure, duration of myeloma and number of prior therapies. Len in combination with Dex was more effective than Dex in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma despite prior thal exposure. Results with Len/Dex were superior for those not exposed to thal, suggesting some, but not complete, cross resistance between Len and thal. Len/Dex vs Dex with or without Prior Thal Thal (N=274) No Thal (N=430) LD D p LD D p Intent-to-Treat (n) 126 148 227 203 TTP (med. weeks) 36.9 19.9 <.001 61.3 20.4 <.001 OR (%) 54.0 14.9 <.001 63.4 27.6 <.001 PR (%) 42.1 12.8 <.001 32.2 23.2 <.05 NCR (%) 4.0 0.7 <.001 13.2 2.0 <.001 CR (%) 7.9 1.4 <.01 18.1 2.5 <.001

Lenalidomide/Dexamethasone Improves Response and Prolongs Time to Progression, Even in Patients with IgA Multiple Myeloma: A Sub-Analysis of the MM-009/010 Studies.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 4839-4839 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Foa ◽  
Donna Weber ◽  
Meletios Dimopoulos ◽  
Marta Olesnyckyj ◽  
Zhinuan Yu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
High Response Rate ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: Historically, patients with IgA multiple myeloma (MM) respond poorly to treatment. In 2 recent phase III trials, Lenalidomide (Len) in combination with Dexamethasone (Dex) led to an overall response (OR) rate of approximately 60% (61% in MM-009 and 60% in MM-010), a complete response (CR) rate of about 15% (14% and 16%, respectively), an overall survival (OS) of at least 29.5 months (29.5 and not yet reached), and a median time to progression (TTP) of at least 11.1 months (11.1 months and 11.3 months, respectively) in patients with relapsed/refractory MM. In both studies, OR, CR, OS and TTP were significantly better with Len/Dex than with Dex alone. Here, we assess the impact of IgA disease on the efficacy and tolerability of treatment with Len/Dex versus Dex alone. Methods: Data were pooled from the MM-009 and MM-010 studies. Patients were randomized to receive Len (25 mg/day on days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle) or placebo. Both groups received Dex 40mg PO q.d. on days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20 (for the first four cycles). After four cycles, Dex 40 mg/day was administered only on days 1–4. Response to therapy, TTP, OS, and adverse events were assessed. Response rate and TTP were based on data obtained before unblinding (June 2005 [MM-009] and August 2005 [MM-010]). Results: Of 154 patients with IgA at baseline, 72 were treated with Len/Dex and 82 with Dex alone. Among those without IgA, 281 received Len/Dex and 269 received Dex alone. Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment groups. Len/Dex was associated with a significantly higher OR and longer median TTP than Dex alone in patients with and without IgA (Table). In the non-IgA group, patients treated with Len/Dex had a significantly longer OS than those treated with Dex alone. Response, TTP and OS were comparable between IgA and non-IgA patient groups. There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between patients with and without IgA. Among those with IgA, the most common grade 3–4 adverse events with Len/Dex and Dex alone were neutropenia (37.5% and 2.4%), thrombocytopenia (16.7% and 8.5%), and anemia (11.1% and 7.3%). The respective rates for patients without IgA were 46.5% and 14.5%, 12.1% and 5.7%, and 11.0% and 5.7%. Conclusion: In patients with and in those without IgA MM, Len/Dex treatment induces a high response rate and a prolonged TTP compared with Dex. IgA non-IgA Clinical response, % Len/Dex (n=72) Dex alone (n=82) P Len/Dex (n=281) Dex alone (n=269) P OR 68.1 18.3 <0.001 57.7 23.0 <0.001 CR 18.1 0 NS 14.2 2.6 NS PR 38.9 15.9 NS 35.6 19.3 NS Median TTP, wks 44.3 16.4 <0.001 52.1 20.1 <0.001 Median OS, wks 130.4 102.4 NS 156.0 136.1 <0.05

Prolonged Overall Survival with Lenalidomide Plus Dexamethasone Compared with Dexamethasone Alone in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 412-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna Weber ◽  
Robert Knight ◽  
Christine Chen ◽  
Andrew Spencer ◽  
Zhinuan Yu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Prior Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
P Value ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

Abstract Introduction: Lenalidomide (Len), an analog of thalidomide (Thal) is a novel, oral, immunomodulatory agent that is effective against multiple myeloma (MM). In 2 prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trials, Len with dexamethasone (Dex) induced a significantly higher overall response (OR) rate and complete remission (CR) rate, as well as longer time-to-progression (TTP) in comparison with Dex alone. Here, we investigate the long-term overall survival (OS) with Len/Dex. Methods: We evaluated the pooled results from both randomized trials (MM-009, MM-010) of 704 patients who had relapsed or refractory MM, without prior resistance to Dex, who received either Len (25 mg daily for 3 weeks every 4 weeks), or placebo. Dex was given at 40 mg on days 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 every 4 weeks for 4 cycles. From cycle 5 onwards, Dex was given at 40 mg on days 1–4 only. Response rate and TTP are based on data obtained before unblinding (June 2005 [MM-009] and August 2005 [MM-010]). Follow-up data on OS were obtained up to January 2007. Forty-seven percent of patients who received placebo/Dex crossed over to receive Len +/− Dex. Results: Of 704 patients, 353 were treated with Len/Dex and 351 with Dex alone. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between patients receiving Len/Dex and those receiving Dex alone. Median TTP, OR, and CR were significantly improved in patients treated with Len/Dex compared with Dex alone (Table). Of patients who progressed on Dex alone prior to unblinding, or were found to be receiving Dex alone after unblinding, 47% crossed over to Len +/− Dex. Despite these patients crossing over to Len +/− Dex at progression or at the time of unblinding, the OS was significantly improved in patients treated with Len/Dex compared with Dex alone (hazard ratio 1.295; 95% confidence interval 1.040–1.614; p=0.02). Median OS in the Len/Dex group was 35 months and 31 in the Dex alone group (p<0.05). Median OS was also significantly longer with Len/Dex compared with Dex alone in patients with more than 1 prior therapy (32.4 months versus 27.3 months, p<0.05). Similar median OS was observed with Len/Dex and Dex alone in patients with 1 prior therapy (median OS not yet reached and 35.3 months, p=0.24). Conclusion: With increased follow-up and despite cross-over, patients treated first with Len/Dex had significantly improved OS compared with those treated with Dex alone. Len/Dex (n=353) Dex alone (n=351) P value OR, % 60.6 21.9 <0.001 CR, % 15.0 2.0 <0.001 Median TTP, months 11.2 4.7 <0.001 Median OS, months 35.0 31.0 <0.05 Median OS in patients with 1 prior treatment, months not yet reached 35.3 0.24 Median OS in patients with >1 prior treatment, months 32.4 27.3 <0.05

Carfilzomib in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients with early or late relapse following prior therapy: A subgroup analysis of the randomized phase 3 ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR trials

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 463-470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria-Victoria Mateos ◽  
Hartmut Goldschmidt ◽  
Jesus San-Miguel ◽  
Joseph Mikhael ◽  
Lucy DeCosta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Late Relapse ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Prior Therapy

Daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone in relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): A comparison with contemporary clinical trials.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20011-e20011
Author(s):  
Barry Paul ◽  
Myra M. Robinson ◽  
Jordan Robinson ◽  
Ami Ndiaye ◽  
Manisha Bhutani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Plasma Cells ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Previously Treated

e20011 Background: Multiple Myeloma (MM) is an incurable malignancy of terminally differentiated plasma cells. The combination of pomalidomide/dexamethasone with either daratumumab or isatuximab is FDA approved for relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) based on randomized phase III trial data. Herein, we compare our center’s experience with published data to help identify the most appropriate patient population for this regimen outside of the context of clinical trials. Methods: We interrogated our internal plasma cell disorder database to identify all patients with RRMM at our institution who were treated with the combination of daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (Dara-Pd). We evaluated the best response achieved, overall response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) measured from initiation on Dara-Pd. Kaplan Meier methods were used to estimate PFS and OS curves. Fisher’s exact tests and log rank tests were used to determine the association between outcomes and variables of interest. Results: Between Dec 2015 and Dec 2020, 98 patients were identified, of which 97 were evaluable for response. Median number of prior lines of therapy was 2 (range 1-12), with 23 patients (23%) previously treated with 3 prior lines and 24 patients (25%) previously treated with ≥4 lines of therapy. Most patients were refractory to an IMiD (79.6%), a PI (65.3%), or both (56.1%). The ORR was 69.1%, > VGPR rate was 33%. ORR was significantly improved for patients who received Dara-Pd after 1 line (p = 0.03), but depth of response (≥VGPR), was similar (p = 0.62). At a median follow up of 10.8 months, 1-year PFS was 76.6% in patients after 1 line, 38.8% in patients after 2-3 lines, and 35% in patients after > 4 lines. Overall response rates appear comparable to published phase III trials comparing the combination of Pd with or without an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (Table 1). While PFS was somewhat lower in our population, subset analysis showed that PFS was significantly lower in patients who were PI refractory (10.8 months vs 6 months; p = 0.014), and in patients who were both IMiD and PI refractory (20.4 months vs 6 months p = 0.01), but OS was similar in these populations. Conclusions: Our data suggests that the combination of Dara-Pd has activity in heavily pretreated patients, including patients who are both IMiD and PI refractory and remains a viable option for these patients outside the context of a clinical trial.[Table: see text]

The Prolonged Time to Progression with Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin + Bortezomib Versus Bortezomib Alone in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma Is Unaffected by Extent of Prior Therapy or Previous Anthracycline Exposure.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 410-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan Blade ◽  
Jesus San Miguel ◽  
Arnon Nagler ◽  
Pieter Sonneveld ◽  
Andrew Spencer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Liposomal Doxorubicin ◽  
Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Total Study Population ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Heterogeneity Test

Abstract Recently, a significant improvement in time to progression (TTP) was reported for pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) + bortezomib combination therapy vs. bortezomib monotherapy in a phase III randomized trial in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) (Orlowski, JCO 2007). This pre-specified analysis assessed the efficacy of PLD+bortezomib in RRMM based on the number of prior lines of therapy and previous anthracycline exposure status. Patients with ≥1 prior therapy were randomized to receive PLD at 30 mg/m2 on day 4 and bortezomib at 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11, or bortezomib alone for up to eight 21-day cycles, or at least 2 cycles beyond CR, or optimal response unless disease progression, or unacceptable toxicities occurred. The baseline beta-2 microglobulin levels were comparable between the subgroup with ≥2 prior treatments and that with 1 treatment (median 3.98 vs. 4.01 mg/L), as well as between anthracycline-exposed and -naïve patients (median 3.91 vs. 4.55 mg/L). The improved TTP reported previously with PLD+bortezomib over bortezomib in the total study population was similarly observed in all four subgroups of patients (patients with ≥2 lines of prior therapy or 1 prior therapy, anthracycline-exposed (median 144 mg/m2 in both treatment arms) or -naïve groups (Table)), indicating a consistent therapeutic benefit favoring the PLD+bortezomib combination. Furthermore, TTP was comparable for the PLD+bortezomib combination between groups with ≥2 lines of prior therapy vs. 1 prior therapy (heterogeneity test, p=0.523), as well as patients who were anthracycline-exposed or -naïve (heterogeneity test, p=0.716). Incidence of treatment-related SAEs, grade 3/4 neuropathy, and symptomatic cardiac events was comparable between treatment arms in each subgroup (Table). PLD-related hand-foot syndrome was also <10% in all PLD+bortezomib subgroups. These results demonstrate that PLD+bortezomib combination therapy significantly improves TTP compared to bortezomib alone, regardless of the number of prior lines of therapy, or anthracycline exposure.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document